Will it have any positive or negative effects on productivity, morale,
motivation, etc? Would it change anything if only the developer sees
As the other answers state, implementing what you state in the question as you state it in the question will have serious impacts on motivation and productivity as folks update their CVs and get out.
I tend to agree with all of those answers, and really think that this is a disaster waiting to happen, but I think that there's another question hiding in your question which is, "If my bosses are hell-bent on implementing this anyway, how can I minimize the harm?"
Not saying this won't cause any problems. I think it will as mentioned above. I just think that if they are going to do it anyway (because if the question is indicative of the attitudes of management, they won't care if it will kill motivation as they've already decided the use of facebook/youtube is more important), it is important to think about minimizing the harm caused.
The first, and most important thing is don't lie to the employees, all of the below suggestions are based on the assumption that they will be implemented in good faith by the management. Since this is incredibly sensitive and has the potential for a mass exodus from your company, I cannot state the importance of doing this in an honest and transparent way enough.
I would suggest the following steps to minimize (but not eliminate) the chilling effects that every other answer seems to cover pretty well.
1) Analysis, not Assumption
Your question contains two massive red flags that cause me serious pause:
[The goals of this program are:]
- reducing time spent on online video streaming/social network sites (increasing work time),
- give feedback to the developers (and their managers) about their time spent on work/non-work activities.
This screams, "Management have already decided that facebook and youtube kill productivity and are looking for metrics to figure out where to place blame." This is a very dangerous approach because the assumption on what makes developers productive is made before any analysis is done.
If you want to sell this to employees, you have to make sure that the bosses understand that they will just alienate productive employees if they assume what makes a productive office before even gathering, let alone analyzing data.
2) Step-by-Step Implementation
Any implementation should be done in steps. For instance, just start by looking at how often people use the keyboard/mouse. Analyze that data over 3 months, and see if it actually correlates with productivity. This reinforces the point in step 1), which is to say that the goal is not to lay blame, but rather to figure out how workers work (without judgment).
By implementing slowly, and piecemeal, this will give more ammo for you (or anyone on the side of the employees) to show why the analysis isn't showing what the management wants it to (that employees are untrustworthy and are wasting company resources on social media). Assuming it isn't showing that.
3) For a Limited Time Only
Be sure that the bosses clearly concede that this is:
- For analysis, not assigning of blame
- Limited in scope of implementation
- A conclusion will be reached on date X and revisited then
Once the system gets created, there will be a huge incentive on the part of cost-conscious management to say, "We've already spent the money to implement it, we should keep it running forever!" The issue is that this will upset many employees. The management needs to be incredibly transparent and straightforward on what the scope and goal of the project is to minimize the negative effects.
It would be even better if management was really just trying to make it easier to do time tracking for the developers, and would only implement a system to track it group- or team-wise with no identifying information about any single person. I doubt there's any chance of that though (and if it isn't true, don't lie to the employees).